CLARK - Several opponents of the proposed route for the Trans- Canada Keystone pipeline through South Dakota said at a public hearing on Thursday night that a federal study of the project's potential environmental, economic and social impacts is incomplete. They said the analysis should also look at the potential effects from an oil refinery that might be built near Elk Point. The hearing was the second of two held in South Dakota this week by the U.S. Department of State on its draft environmental impact study. The federal agency is considering whether to grant a presidential permit necessary for the crude-oil pipeline to cross the border from Canada into the United States. "Our decision criteria is basically: Is it in the national interest?" Jeff Izzo, a Department of State official, told the approximately 50 people gathered at the Clark community center. “We also weigh Pipeline: that against the impacts." Curt Hohn of Aberdeen, general manager of the WEB rural water system, gave a half-hour presentation against the pipeline. Both Hohn and Lillian Anderson of Langford called for federal officials to analyze the Hyperion refinery project in conjunction with the pipeline. "There's going to be a pipeline coming in. Is there a connection between the two? We believe there is," Hohn said. "Elk Point refinery and this project are joined at the hip." Hohn, Anderson, Kent Moeckly of Britton, Mike and Susan Sibson of rural Howard and several other landowners testified against the project. Most said the Interstate 29 corridor is a better route. "This is my land. It's not for sale," Mike Sibson said. "If America needs oil that bad, they should be willing to pay us for it." The South Dakota segment would start in Marshall County at the North Dakota border and cross through Day, Clark, Beadle, Kingsbury, Miner, Hanson, McCook, Hutchinson and Yankton counties on its way into Nebraska. TransCanada plans to build a pipeline from Alberta through Saskatchewan, Manitoba, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois and possibly Oklahoma. Among the conclusions in the draft, surface water or groundwater isn't anticipated to be adversely impacted by normal disposal, noncatastrophic spills or leaks. The public comment period on the draft environmental impact statement closes Sept. 24. "Are we protecting the landowners from this foreign company? I've never heard that from the federal level," Moeckly said. He criticized the governor, legislators, South Dakota members of Congress, county commissioners and others for not focusing on landowners' concerns and not asking landowners whether TransCanada is treating them fairly. Moeckly also criticized the landowners who have reached land deals with TransCanada. "They traded a few pieces of silver for an ambiguous easement," he said. He said landowners are taking the risk by letting the pipeline come through. "We're just supposed to bend over," he said. "Upfront payment has to be a lot more than this little bit of money."